spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: "SPF for Dummies" asked

2004-03-31 15:51:18
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 03:55:58PM -0600, Gordon Fecyk wrote:
| > Pretty much the entire thing needs to be implemented; there's just one
| > level of conformance as far as parsing/interpretation go.  What the
| > receiver chooses to do with the result is up to him, of 
| > course, but the way the result is obtained is unequivocal.
| 
| The lookups are one thing, parsing the results is the problem.  You're asking
| the receipient to enforce a complex set of rules that can vary from sender to
| sender.  No wonder the IETF fogies have their skivvies in a knot.  "Where's
| the debugger?" was the question asked at the 59th IETF, and I don't think
| there's an answer yet.
| 
| The minimum you've defined is too much at once, leaving too much room for
| implementation mistakes and incorrect assumptions.  What might help, if the
| minimum can't be changed, is a skeleton source code implementation that
| leaves platform-specific things undefined while keeping the highest level
| calls consistent.  "SPF for Dummies" in source code, if you will.

Does anyone have a count of the number of lines of perl, python, c, etc
for libspf and libspf-alt?

I've observed that the people only complain about writing a parser
before they've written it; after they write it they say "well, that
wasn't so bad."


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: "SPF for Dummies" asked, Meng Weng Wong <=